Skip to main content

About your Search

20121112
20121120
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
at "the washington post" to figure out who might be president. i started that process with bill clinton, turning it into a book, and so there was an assumption when i wrote about barack obama in 2008, an assumption by my friends and colleagues that i would just immediately launch into the boying of barack obama, and i haveƱhr to say it was onef the more disk decisions made in my career, and it had nothing to do with barack obama, but what i consider to be the increasingly toxic nature of superficial nature offed -- of modern american politics. i was not sure i wanted to spend three or four years trying to get the true story and throw that into the swath of this culture knowing that there would be people who could try to manipulate any fact and turn it for their political purposes, which, to some extent, is what happened early on until i refused to let it happen more. in any cation, on election night in 2008, i decided i had to do the book, and the story, itself, is what was drawing me into it in a way that transcended any of my concerns about the political culture. this book is really
debate, how striking was it that when mitt romney presto, from his response was, well, under bill clinton there was great economic prosperity are the holy observer, is all about bill clinton and how nifty the economy was under him. i've got to tell you, i would've given a link to see that romney turned to him and say, mr. president, i knew bill clinton. [laughter] our ideas work, their ideas don't. the last four years our economy has grown 1.5% a year. that is less than half the historical average. for 70 years has averaged 3.3% growth a year. and this president is fond of saying he inherited the worst economy in the history of the universe. and everything, by the way, is george w. bush's fault. he doesn't have much historical memory when he makes that argument. any of you all remember 1978, 1979? double-digit unemployment, 22% interest rates gas lines, stagflation in 1888 different president. ronald reagan inherited a struggling economy. and reagan implemented policies 180 degrees opposite those of obama. incentive jacking up taxes, he slashed taxes. instead of exploding spending on the
the rates. think about it. we haven't touched it since ronald reagan really. in 1986. bill clinton did raise the rate one point but we haven't done anything to touch our rate and reform our code. every other country, all of them have. taxes gone from 16% to 15%. you do business there. this flow of capital will follow countries that have more competitive environment and taxes are one of them. yes, we have to reform the tax code. when you do that, i will get more revenue. it is guaranteed. again, sort of as i was talking about earlier. this is opportunities here. this is opportunity for us as a country. if you look at the congressional budget analysis and joint tax committee analysis, what tax reform could mean in terms of macroeconomic impact and growth, all will lead to more growth, whether corporate tax reform or individual tax reform. >> right but if the president insists as he did last friday, this was fought over in the campaign and, fought over tax rates, rising tax rates, he didn't ice the words rates himself but jay carney, the white house press secretary said the president will veto
. that is pretty evil. >> i don't think that happened under reagan or under bill clinton. marginal tax rate increase that democrats are looking for will do nothing more than help support the majority of middle class americans that not only support increases on, increase in tax rates on people who are earning over $250,000 but also support not cutting things like social security and medicare and medicaid. and so i think the democrats come in not feeling very, very, rather feeling very strong around this idea that they can create the right compromise and right balance to move this country forward. rick: terry, bill kristol, the prominent conservative, spent last couple days on this network talking about how republicans may want to go along with the president's plan to raise tax rates on those earners above 250,000. take a listen. i'll get your response. this is last night an "special report". >> the first takes rates expire on december 31st. rates are going up for everyone if nothing happens. if you think republicans can win a showdown preserving all the current tax rates against a president
of legislating. he is going to have to provide some leadership. when bill clinton was president, we got things done. welfare reform, put ability of insurance. balanced-budget and a surplus. clinton was directly involved. i remember getting a call from him at weird hours of the night. [laughter] >> i always wondered what he was doing a. [laughter] >> but he would know the section of the bill and how much money was in it. and i remember there was one like the children's health care thing and he said, i don't know, let's add 10 million more. but we made some concessions to him and he made concessions to us and we got the job done. but i guess now i'm going to begin to act a little bit like a republican. first of all, while the democrats won, i would not call this a mandate. there is a mandate, it is for the president and the congress to start working together. he does not talk to the members of congress. democrats will tell you that. he hasn't been engaged. the problem is not enough revenue. the problem is too much spending. now, some of the republican. the solution is that we are going to have t
. and clinton was directly involved. i can remember getting calls from him at weird hours of the night. i always wondered what he was doing up. [laughter] he would know the section of a bill and how much money was in it. and i remember one like the schip, the children's health care program. he said, can we add 10 million more which was chicken feet. he made concessions to us and we made concessions to him and we got the job done. i think i am going to act a little bit like a republican. first off, while the democrats won, i wouldn't call this a mandate. if there's a mandate, it is for the president and the congress to start working together. he doesn't talk to members of congress. democrats will tell you that. he just -- he hasn't been engaged. and the problem is not enough revenue. the problem is too much spending. now, i sound like a republican. the solution, though, is we're going to find a way to get more some revenue and the ways to do it that would still provide growth in the economy without stifling growth and we're going to have to get entitlement reform. we're going to have to control s
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)